|Previous Page||Next Page|
rights and powers of the people of Hawaii, as being peaceful or revolutionary?
Mr. Stalker. Certainly revolutionary.
Senator Gray. I will ask you in that connection: Considering that revolutionary, would you consider the fact that no such proclamation of a change of constitution was actually declared, though intended to be declared, coupled with the fact that there was a declaration from the Queen that she had abandoned all idea of changing the constitution, except in accordance with its terms and requirements, revolutionary?
Mr. Stalker. The substitution of a constitution in any such way would be revolutionary.
Senator Gray. Read the question. The question was read as follows: "I will ask you in that connection: Considering that revolutionary, would you consider the fact that no such proclamation of a constitution was actually declared, though intended to be declared, coupled with the fact that there was a declaration from the Queen that she had abandoned all idea of changing the constitution, except in accordance with its terms and requirements, revolutionary?"
Mr. Stalker. That would admit of a doubt, at least of its being revolutionary.
Senator Gray. You are asked not a hypothetical question, but a question as to conduct that occurred. The Queen did, according to the evidence, announce her intention of proclaiming, on her own authority, a new constitution; but she never actually did it, but told those who wanted her to do it, and those of the population who were disposed to favor it, that she would defer it. She afterwards issued a proclamation to her people why she abandoned all idea of changing the constitution, except in accordance with its terms and requirements. Taking all that conduct together, do you consider it revolutionary?
Mr. Stalker. I should hardly think it was revolutionary.
The Chairman. The latter part of that question you certainly would not; that is, you came to the conclusion that the Queen intended to amend it in accordance with existing law?
Mr. Stalker. No; but to change it in accordance with existing law.
The Chairman. Take the first part of the question, with reference to the methods provided in the constitution of '87, by which the Queen assumed the right to declare the new constitution. Would you regard that revolutionary or a regular proceeding?
Senator Gray. That is, if she had proclaimed it?
The Chairman. I speak of her purpose.
Mr. Stalker. Can I answer that in my own way?
The Chairman. Yes; it is your own way we want; not anybody else's.
Mr. Stalker. The act of imposing a constitution in such a way would certainly be irregular and revolutionary; if she had it in mind to do that thing, but did not do it, in my mind it would not be revolutionary. Have I answered that question?
The Chairman. Yes. Suppose that the Queen had it in mind, and was prevented only by the fact of an opposing force which she was afraid would overturn her Government, would her motive and conduct be less revolutionary than they would have been had she gone on and accomplished it in the absence of such an opposing force?
Mr. Stalker. The motive might be; the conduct would not be.
Senator Gray. Are you aware that this constitution of 1887 that the Queen had sworn to support, had been proclaimed by the King in precisely
the same way that the Queen proposed to proclaim the new constitution?
Mr. Stalker. Yes.
Senator Gray. Without any reference to the Legislative Assembly or to the people at large?
Mr. Stalker. Yes.
Senator Gray. You have already stated where you were from, and why you were out on those islands—that you had no interest politically, commercially or otherwise in those islands to affect your inclinations or feelings in regard to this matter?
Mr. Stalker. None whatever.
Senator Gray. You were not a partisan of either side?
Mr. Stalker. No.
Senator Gray. To what party do you belong in this country?
Mr. Stalker. I am a Republican.
Adjourned until to-morrow, the 26th instant, at 10 o'clock a.m.
- 1 Washington, D. C, Friday, January 26, 1894.
- 2 Washington, D. C, Monday, January 29,1894.
Washington, D. C, Friday, January 26, 1894.
The subcommittee met pursuant to adjournment.
Present: The Chairman (Senator Morgan) and Senator Frye.
Absent: Senators Butler, Gray, and Sherman.
SWORN STATEMENT OF JOHN A. M'CANDLESS—Continued.
The Chairman. I have examined the paper you handed me, entitled Two Weeks of Hawaiian History, from January 14 to January 28, and I find that it is copied into Mr. Blount's report. Do you agree with the statements in that history as being substantially true?
Mr. McCandless. I do.
The Chairman. The proceedings of the meeting which you attended, the mass meeting, as therein set forth are true as therein stated?
Mr. McCandless. They are true, except as I have noted. There is a typographical error that makes it the 17th where it should be the 16th, and about there being 1,260 present by actual count.
The Chairman. How many do you think there were?
Mr. McCandless. My estimate is that there from 1,000 to 1,200. This account of the organization of the government I know to be correct.
The Chairman. Have you a list of the officers who were engaged in movements against the Queen's government?
Mr. McCandless. I have a list [producing paper.] That is a partial list of the military officers engaged against the Queen's Government, it being a list of the officers who were in the revolution of 1887.
The Chairman. Were they in that revolution as officers or privates?
Mr. McCandless. As officers. I have given their official standing from 1887 to 1890. In 1890 they were disbanded, and the same ones came on the 17th of January, 1893, in support of the revolution.
The paper submitted by Mr. McCandless is as follows:
S. Doc. 231, pt 6------ 65
"EX-OFFICERS OF THE HONOLULU RlFLES IN 1887-'90 AND WHO WERE ACTIVELY CONNECTED WITH THE REVOLUTION OF JANUARY 17, 1893.
"G.F. McLeod, late adjutant; J.H. Fisher, late captain Company B; C.W. Ziegler, late captain Company A; H. Gunn, late captain of ordnance; J.M. Camara, late captain Company C; A. Gartenborg, late captain of ordnance; W.W. Hall, late captain and quartermaster; J.L. Tolbert, late first lieutenant Company A; G.C. Potter, late first lieutenant Company B; J.M. Vivas, late first lieutenant Company C; J. Asch, late second lieutenant Company A; I.A. Burget, late second lieutenant Company A; J.V. Simonsen, late second lieutenant Company A; T.E. Wall, late second lieutenant Company B; A.G. Silver, late second lieutenant Company C.
"In addition to this most of the noncommissioned officers were with us also."
The Chairman. On page 448 of Executive Document No. 47, House of Representatives, I observe the names of the officers of the Hawaiian Patriotic League; and these persons have also signed a statement which the President sent to the House of Representatives; which statement purports to express the opinions of 8,000 native Hawaiians in regard to the maintenance of the monarchy and annexation of the islands to the United States. I will ask you to state in respect to these persons what their standing is in Honolulu?
Mr. McCandless. Mr. Cummings is a half-white, whose father left him very well off, and he has practically squandered the whole of the fortune. The next two, Joseph Nawhi and Bush, I would refer you to Minister Willis's report in regard to their characters.
Senator Frye. What does Minister Willis say of them?
Mr. McCandless. That they are men of no standing, and that Mr. Bush is of very bad reputation, which I know to be a fact. The others I know; they are men of no standing, and of bad reputation in the Hawaiian Islands.
Adjourned until Monday, the 29th instant, at 10 o'clock a. m.
Washington, D. C, Monday, January 29,1894.
The subcommittee met pursuant to adjournment.
Present, the chairman (Senator Morgan) and Senators Butler, Gray, and Frye.
Absent, Senator Sherman.
Senator Frye. Mr. Chairman, I move that the correspondence which has been submitted to Congress since the order under which this committee has been acting, and such as may be sent in before the committee shall have closed its investigation, shall be made a part of this record.
The Chairman. That is proper.
SW0RN STATEMENT OF WILLIAM S. BOWEN.
Senator Frye. State your business and residence?
Mr. Bowen. I am a journalist and reside in New York City.
Senator Frye. You are connected with what paper?
Mr. Bowen. The New York World.
Senator Frye. Editorially?
Mr. Bowen. Mine is a peculiar, unique position. I am the confidential man to the proprietor of the World.
Senator Frye. Were you sent to the Hawaiian Islands at anytime?
Mr. Bowen. I was, last winter.
Senator Frye. At what time did you go?
Mr. Bowen. I sailed from San Francisco on the 31st of March.
Senator Frye. And arrived in the islands when?
Mr. Bowen. On the 7th of April.
Senator Frye. How long did you remain there?
Mr. Bowen. Until the 26th of April.
Senator Frye. What was the purpose of your visit to the islands?
Mr. Bowen. I was sent there by the World merely to study the situation and note the conditions prevailing there. My visit was hastened somewhat by the report that a special commissioner had gone to the islands. I followed him from San Francisco.
Senator Frye. Do you know what time Commissioner Blount arrived in the islands?
Mr. Bowen. About ten days before I did.
Senator Frye. Did you make, as yon were instructed to do, an examination into the condition of affairs of the islands at that time?
Mr. Bowen. I did. I did not stay so long as I had expected to do; but I made an examination to the best of my ability.
Senator Frye. Did you become acquainted with the members of the Provisional Government?
Mr. Bowen. I did.
Senator Frye. What kind of men did you find them to be?
Mr. Bowen. I found Mr. Dole, the President, to be a man of the highest character. In fact, I was surprised: I had a different impression before I went out to the islands. I found Mr. Dole and most of the members of the Provisional Government to be men who would compare favorably with the best of our public men—Mr. Dole, especially.
Senator Frye. Did you become acquainted with the Queen's special supporters?
Mr. Bowen. I did.
Senator Frye. What estimate did you form of them?
Mr. Bowen. With one or two exceptions, I found them to partake more of the Polynesian type than that of the Anglo Saxon. I found the Queen's principal adviser to be a man of mixed blood, an amiable, kindly gentleman, but like a child as compared with the others.
Senator Frye. Who was that?
Mr. Bowen. Mr. Sam Parker, a happy-go-lucky man, but one who was very kind to me.
Senator Frye. You may state generally what investigations you made there during the time you were present.
Mr. Bowen. The policy of the paper to which I am attached is one of investigation, with opposition to annexation. Of course, I wished to follow specially the policy of my paper. I had not been in the islands over twenty four hours before my personal sympathies tended toward the side of annexation. That is, I found a charming place, a beautiful island; I found a little city that compares favorably with any city in the United States, except in the Chinese quarters; I found electric lights, street cars, good police, and the telephone more used in proportion to the population than anywhere else in the world. I found a delightful society. I was entertained a good deal at dinners. The conventionalities of life are more strictly observed there than anywhere
|Previous Page||Next Page|